Gujarat High Court
Ahmedabad Urban Development ... vs Sonal D Patel on 27 October, 2021
Bench: Aniruddha P. Mayee
C/LPA/134/2018 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 134 of 2018
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10704 of 2009
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 1 of 2018
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 134 of 2018
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 135 of 2018
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10711 of 2009
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 1 of 2018
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 135 of 2018
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10711 of 2009
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1531 of 2019
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10711 of 2009
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2017
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1531 of 2019
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10711 of 2009
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1532 of 2019
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10704 of 2009
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2017
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1532 of 2019
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10704 of 2009
==========================================================
AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Versus
SONAL D PATEL & 14 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KAMAL TRIVEDI, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for
Page 1 of 7
Downloaded on : Mon Jan 17 03:32:27 IST 2022
C/LPA/134/2018 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR SAHIL TRIVEDI, AGP (99) for the Respondent(s) No. 14
MR HARDIK P MEHTA(6943) for the Respondent(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 27/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
Learned senior advocate Mr.Kamal Trivedi with learned
advocate Mr.Hemant Munshaw appears for the appellant
Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (AUDA) in Letters
Patent Appeal No.134 of 2018 and Letters Patent Appeal No.135
of 2018. Learned advocate Mr.Hardik Mehta appears for the
respondents- original petitioners in both the appeals.
1.1 In other two connected Letters Patent Appeal Nos.1531 of
2019 and 1532 of 2019, learned advocate Mr.N.K.Majmudar
appears for the appellants whereas learned senior advocate
Mr.Kamal Trivedi with learned advocate Mr.H.M.Munshaw are
for respondent- AUDA.
1.2 As per the consent and request of all the learned advocates
appearing for the parties, the appeals were taken up for final
consideration to be treated by this common order.
2. Letters Patent Appeal No.134 0f 2018 and Letters Patent
Appeal No.135 of 2018 arose from common judgment and order
dated 8.11.2017 of learned Single Judge passed in Special Civil
Application No.10704 of 2009 and Special Civil Application
No.10711 of 2009, respectively. These two petitions came to be
C/LPA/134/2018 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
allowed by learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge directed
the appellant AUDA to pass orders treating the petitioners as
regular employees from the date of their initial appointment. It
was further provided that the petitioners will be further entitled
to all the benefits which are available to the regularly recruited
employees.
2.1 The other Letters Patent Appeals are by the private
respondents who were concerned with their seniority which was
likely to be affected adverse if the impugned orders of the
learned Single Judge were to be acted upon or to be
implemented.
3. In course of hearing of all the Letters Patent Appeals, a
broad consensus emerged amongst the learned advocates
representing the respective parties. On the basis of such
consensus, consent terms were prepared in Letters Patent
Appeal No.134 0f 2018 and Letters Patent Appeal No.135 of the
2018. They are signed by learned advocates for the appellant
and learned advocates for respondent Nos.1 to 13 and
respondent Nos.1 to 10 respectively in two appeals, who were
original petitioners.
3.1 The parties accordingly agreed as under, extracting the
relevant portion from the consent terms in Letters Patent
Appeals No.134 of 2018.
"Consent Terms in Letters Patent No.134 of 2018,
(a) That AUDA shall regularize the services of the
Respondents who are presently working as the
'Supervisors (Surveyors)' and treat them as 'Regular
Employees', from the date on which they had
C/LPA/134/2018 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
approached this Hon'ble Court, i.e. 05.10.2009, by
way of filing the Special Civil Application No.10704
of 2009;
(b) That the aforementioned regularization benefits
shall be extended to the Respondents who are
presently working with the AUDA, i,e. Respondent
No. 2- Mr. Kalpesh P. Patel; Respondent No.3 - Mr.
Hiren G. Shukla; Respondent No.7 - Mr.Pankaj R.
Goswami; Respondent No.8 - Mr.Gaurang R. Amin
and Respondent No.12- Mr.Shashikant K. Soni.
(c) That the Respondents agree and understand
that the present Consent Terms are arrived at in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, which
shall not be taken as a precedent for any such future
appointment or in any other case.
(d) That the regularization of the employment of
Respondent No. 2- Mr. Kalpesh P. Patel; Respondent
No.3 - Mr. Hiren G. Shukla; Respondent No.7 -
Mr.Pankaj R. Goswami; Respondent No.8 -
Mr.Gaurang R. Amin and Respondent No.12-
Mr.Shashikant K. Soni shall not affect the seniority
of the current regular employees of the Appellant-
AUDA."
3.2 The consent terms in Letters Patent Appeal No.135
of 2018 are identical, as under,
Consent terms in Letters Patent Appeal No.135 of
2018,
(a) That AUDA shall regularize the services of the
Respondents who are presently working as the
'Planning Assistant(s)' and treat them as 'Regular
Employees', from the date on which they had
approached this Hon'ble Court, i.e. 05.10.2009, by
way of filing the Special Civil Application No.10711
of 2009;
C/LPA/134/2018 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
(b) That the aforementioned regularization
benefits shall be extended to the Respondents who
are presently working with the AUDA, i,e.
Respondent No. 1- Ms.Rupal A. Joshi; Respondent
No.2 - Ms.Purvi R. Shah; Respondent No.4- Mr.Bijal
S. Shah; Respondent No.5 - Mr.Mahendra S.
Makwana; Respondent No.8 - Mr. Jigar G. Patel and
Respondent No.10 - Ms.Shital R. Pillai.
(c) That the Respondents agree and understand
that the present Consent Terms are arrived at in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, which
shall not be taken as a precedent for any such future
appointment or in any other case.
(d) That the regularization of the employment of
Respondent No. 1- Ms.Rupal A. Joshi; Respondent
No.2 - Ms.Purvi R. Shah; Respondent No.4- Mr.Bijal
S. Shah; Respondent No.5 - Mr.Mahendra S.
Makwana; Respondent No.8 - Mr. Jigar G. Patel and
Respondent No.10 - Ms.Shital R. Pillai, shall not
affect the seniority of the current regular employees
of the Appellant- AUDA."
4. The benefits of regularization as agreed in the consent
terms are to be extended only to those employees- original
petitioners who are presently in service under the appellant-
authority. The consent terms tendered in both the appeals shall
remain on record.
4.1 In Letters Patent Appeal No.134 of 2018, Ms.Sonal D.
Patel, Mr.Rajesh S. Patel, Mr.Ronak S. Dalal, Ms.Karnika R.
Bhatt, Mr.Dharmendrasinh Vaghela, Mr.Dharmendra S.
Chauhan, Ms.Hetal S. Bhatt and Ms.Yagnavalkya V. Joshi,
respondents Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 and 13 respectively, and
similarly, in Letters Patent Appeal No.135 of 2018, Ms.Neeru K.
Pandey, Ms.Monika C. Bhatia, Mr.Ashit C. Pandya, Mr.Suresh K.
C/LPA/134/2018 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
Bholowalia, respondent Nos.3, 6, 7 and 9 respectively, are those
petitioners who resigned from service prior to the date of
judgment of learned Single Judge. The parties have agreed that
the benefits under the orders of the learned Single Judge and on
the basis of the consent terms arrived at as above, shall not be
extended to them.
4.2 Learned advocate for the said original petitioners
mentioned in paragraph No.4.1 above agreed that since those
petitioners- employees are not in service, the benefits will not be
extendable to them.
4.3 At the same time, it was submitted that the said original
petitioners to whom the benefits are not been granted under the
consent terms, may be considered for some beneficial treatment
in the facts of the case. It is observed that their case may be
treated by the authorities appropriately and in accordance with
law in respect of the submission made by their learned advocate.
4.4 It may also be recorded that the appellants of Letters
Patent Appeal No.1531 of 2019 and Letters Patent Appeal
No.1532 of 2019 have concurred with the present arrangement
of consent terms arrived at between the parties and for
modification of granting the benefits to the petitioners as above,
since their grievance about seniority is taken care of by what is
mentioned in clause (d) in consent terms filed in both the Letters
Patent Appeal No.134 0f 2018 and Letters Patent Appeal No.135
of the 2018, reproduced herein above in paragraph No.3.1 and
3.2 respectively.
5. The impugned order of learned Single Judge dated
8.11.2017 in Special Civil Application No.10704 of 2009 and
C/LPA/134/2018 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
Special Civil Application No.10711 of 2009 shall stands modified
in terms of the aforesaid consent terms and what is recorded
herein above. The benefits arising out of the present order to be
paid to the employees- respondents shall be conferred to them
by authorities expeditiously and within ten weeks from the date
of receipt of the order. All the appeals are disposed of
accordingly.
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION
In view of disposal of the main Letters Patent Appeals, all
the captioned Civil Applications will not survive. Accordingly,
Civil Applications are disposed of.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE,J)
Manshi
